Japan Happy Times 1942- Why Not?

predavolk · 06-30-08, 07:08 PM

This is better suited to SH4, but I don't play that sim (where's the challenge in playing a US sub against the Japanese?). Why didn't Japan try to tie down US naval resources by at least making token efforts against their West coast when Germany was clearly having such a fun time on their East coast? I don't think it would have done much in terms of the war, but it might have given them a little more breathing room if they could've sunk a bunch of shipping and tied up the US West Coast navy.

I understand that Japan didn't generally believe in subs, but the opportunity to use the few subs they had, cheaply, for large effect, seems rather obvious in hindsight.

rifleman13 · 06-30-08, 08:08 PM

The Japs didn't use their subs to the extent like Nazi Germany because of their adoption of The Influence of Sea Power upon History by Alfred Mahan which advocates the use of subs against surface combatants instead of merchant shipping.

This led the Japs, because of their traditions and the strategic position in the war, to look for a "decisive battle" with the US Navy. Meaning the US Navy must be defeated by all costs so the Japs can negotiate for peace and badly needed resources. They tried it in Pearl Harbor, Midway, the Coral Sea, and Leyte Gulf and look how it all turned out!

And besides the Japs have the most advanced sub technology out there. They have the largest, fastest and longest range subs in the war. For example the I-400 "Sen Toku" class, considered a descendant of the SSBNs, was a submarine aircraft carrier designed to attack the Panama Canal to force the US Navy to go around Latin America.

The Japs have the tachnology but they didn't use it to the fullest extent! Even after Pearl Harbor...

BulSoldier · 07-01-08, 05:40 AM

Indeed by the begging of the war the japanesse sub fleet was the most advanced.But their role was different than their german conterparts.They used them for reconisance and attacking military targets rather than sinking cargo vessels.

joegrundman · 07-01-08, 07:14 AM

But it is interesting, isn't it. The US sub doctrine before war start was also influenced by the belief that submarines belonged as part of big fleets, but dropped it once war started, heavily influenced by what the Germans were doing

Strange then that the Japanese should be so much more resistant to adaptation given the successes of their own allies.

In my only book of submarine stuff there is in it a Japanese sub captain who apparently got into hot water for demanding permission to conduct guerre de course. Permission was denied.

Out of curiosity, what sort of TDC did the Japanese have?

predavolk · 07-01-08, 08:21 AM

I also strongly believe that Japan should have made a suicidal raid on a US coastal town or village. That kind of mainland attack would've tied up HUGE amounts of resources even if it was a militarily pointless victory that would never be repeated.

But yes, it is interesting how Britain and the US learned from the Germans, but the Japanese, with some of the best potential boats, did not. Attacking the Panama Canal would've been another fantastic idea, especially if they could have sunk a boat IN the canal! Maybe send in a dummy boat loaded with explosives and blow it up? IIRC, Japan was basically just trying to buy enough time to solidify its hold on the West Pacific. It never believed, or intended, to beat the US out of the Pacific forever. Slowing down their enemy, making them waste resources, scaring them away from big fleet actions, etc. all seem like the perfect jobs for subs.

Jimbuna · 07-01-08, 08:40 AM

An interesting idea

A Japanese type HMS Campbeltown/St Nazaire :hmm:

rifleman13 · 07-04-08, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by predavolk

Attacking the Panama Canal would've been another fantastic idea, especially if they could have sunk a boat IN the canal!

No, sinking boats is just too unlikely for the Japanese! They are more daring and want to put a show!

A scuttled ship infront of the locks is easy to remove, BTW!

They must do maximum damage to the Canal Locks in order to, at least, slow down the American advance through the Pacific. The I-400 is the perfect sub for this job. Actually, it was designed to attack the Panama Canal

Yamamoto planned to use these babies against the Canal. They were carrying 3 A6M Seaplanes. Since the end of the war was nearing, obviously, they would use kamikaze tactics.

I also was amazed when they planned to use these boats to attack the East Coast of the US, with bio-weapons!
http://bink77.com/View/link14.php

'Tis a shame really, these boats were really very large! They even dwarfed the Type XXI or the Tench class subs!

Erich dem Roten · 09-30-08, 02:46 PM

As Hartman said, the Japanese code of battle didn't lend itself to submarine warfare very well. That said, they did try numerous missions against the mainland United States and her territories with submarines (like the I-400). There were several mini-subs in the initial attack on Pearl Harbor as well, though they proved very unwieldy and were lost or sunk. I also seem to recall several attempts by the Japanese to release incendiaries over the woodlands in the Pacific Northwest, in an attempt to cause massive fires. On top of all that were missions that were still on paper at the end of the war, many of which included submarines.

Unfortunately, they seemed to see submarines as stealthy means of transport (like getting planes close to the U.S. coast) and less an offensive weapon like the other member countries of WWII.

Piggy · 09-30-08, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich dem Roten

I also seem to recall several attempts by the Japanese to release incendiaries over the woodlands in the Pacific Northwest, in an attempt to cause massive fires

Those were fire Balloons, according to wiki they launched over 9000 of them, some apparently reaching as far as Saskatchewan! Wow.

There was some deaths (5 kids and a women) caused by them, when a young child tampered with one of the bombs in oregon. What a crazy idea. They only took 3 days to cross the pacific in the jet stream!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks...g_World_War_II

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avfusen.html

I didnt realize a Japanese sub actually shelled a lighthouse on vancouver Island (interesting to me because I live in Vancouver) but never managed to hit it. How can you not even hit a stationary target with a big bright light on top!

Although they blacked out the lighthouses after that, which did, in the end cause some ships to sink. Maybe that was the plan all along!

Task Force · 09-30-08, 06:14 PM

Looks as if the japs didnt notice how victorious the US subs were, If they didnt, they were blind.

bookworm_020 · 09-30-08, 11:03 PM

It seems the axis powers were busy in getting to the US

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks...g_World_War_II

nirwana · 10-01-08, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Task Force

Looks as if the japs didnt notice how victorious the US subs were, If they didnt, they were blind.

Hmm victorious in what way ? Cant remember any story, any historic report of it during WW2.

BasilY · 10-02-08, 06:32 PM

Come to think of think of it, Japan never learned the convoy tactics used some well by the Brits.

06-30-08, 07:08 PM	#1
predavolk Weps Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 369 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Japan Happy Times 1942- Why Not? This is better suited to SH4, but I don't play that sim (where's the challenge in playing a US sub against the Japanese?). Why didn't Japan try to tie down US naval resources by at least making token efforts against their West coast when Germany was clearly having such a fun time on their East coast? I don't think it would have done much in terms of the war, but it might have given them a little more breathing room if they could've sunk a bunch of shipping and tied up the US West Coast navy. I understand that Japan didn't generally believe in subs, but the opportunity to use the few subs they had, cheaply, for large effect, seems rather obvious in hindsight.

06-30-08, 08:08 PM	#2
rifleman13 Grey Wolf Join Date: May 2008 Location: Depth-charged to Kingdom Come Posts: 927 Downloads: 28 Uploads: 0	The Japs didn't use their subs to the extent like Nazi Germany because of their adoption of The Influence of Sea Power upon History by Alfred Mahan which advocates the use of subs against surface combatants instead of merchant shipping. This led the Japs, because of their traditions and the strategic position in the war, to look for a "decisive battle" with the US Navy. Meaning the US Navy must be defeated by all costs so the Japs can negotiate for peace and badly needed resources. They tried it in Pearl Harbor, Midway, the Coral Sea, and Leyte Gulf and look how it all turned out! And besides the Japs have the most advanced sub technology out there. They have the largest, fastest and longest range subs in the war. For example the I-400 "Sen Toku" class, considered a descendant of the SSBNs, was a submarine aircraft carrier designed to attack the Panama Canal to force the US Navy to go around Latin America. The Japs have the tachnology but they didn't use it to the fullest extent! Even after Pearl Harbor... Last edited by rifleman13; 06-30-08 at 08:40 PM.

07-01-08, 05:40 AM	#3
BulSoldier Samurai Navy Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Burgas/Bulgaria Posts: 550 Downloads: 40 Uploads: 0	Indeed by the begging of the war the japanesse sub fleet was the most advanced.But their role was different than their german conterparts.They used them for reconisance and attacking military targets rather than sinking cargo vessels. __________________ By the hour !

07-01-08, 07:14 AM	#4
joegrundman Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,689 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	But it is interesting, isn't it. The US sub doctrine before war start was also influenced by the belief that submarines belonged as part of big fleets, but dropped it once war started, heavily influenced by what the Germans were doing Strange then that the Japanese should be so much more resistant to adaptation given the successes of their own allies. In my only book of submarine stuff there is in it a Japanese sub captain who apparently got into hot water for demanding permission to conduct guerre de course. Permission was denied. Out of curiosity, what sort of TDC did the Japanese have? __________________ "Enemy submarines are to be called U-Boats. The term submarine is to be reserved for Allied under water vessels. U-Boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs." Winston Churchill

07-01-08, 08:40 AM	#6
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,712 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	An interesting idea A Japanese type HMS Campbeltown/St Nazaire :hmm: __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

07-01-08, 08:21 AM	#5
predavolk Weps Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 369 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I also strongly believe that Japan should have made a suicidal raid on a US coastal town or village. That kind of mainland attack would've tied up HUGE amounts of resources even if it was a militarily pointless victory that would never be repeated. But yes, it is interesting how Britain and the US learned from the Germans, but the Japanese, with some of the best potential boats, did not. Attacking the Panama Canal would've been another fantastic idea, especially if they could have sunk a boat IN the canal! Maybe send in a dummy boat loaded with explosives and blow it up? IIRC, Japan was basically just trying to buy enough time to solidify its hold on the West Pacific. It never believed, or intended, to beat the US out of the Pacific forever. Slowing down their enemy, making them waste resources, scaring them away from big fleet actions, etc. all seem like the perfect jobs for subs.

09-30-08, 02:46 PM	#8
Erich dem Roten Electrician's Mate Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Connecticut Posts: 134 Downloads: 15 Uploads: 0	As Hartman said, the Japanese code of battle didn't lend itself to submarine warfare very well. That said, they did try numerous missions against the mainland United States and her territories with submarines (like the I-400). There were several mini-subs in the initial attack on Pearl Harbor as well, though they proved very unwieldy and were lost or sunk. I also seem to recall several attempts by the Japanese to release incendiaries over the woodlands in the Pacific Northwest, in an attempt to cause massive fires. On top of all that were missions that were still on paper at the end of the war, many of which included submarines. Unfortunately, they seemed to see submarines as stealthy means of transport (like getting planes close to the U.S. coast) and less an offensive weapon like the other member countries of WWII. __________________

09-30-08, 06:14 PM	#10
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,142 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Looks as if the japs didnt notice how victorious the US subs were, If they didnt, they were blind. __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time"

09-30-08, 11:03 PM	#11
bookworm_020 Navy Seal Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Sinking ships off the Australian coast Posts: 5,966 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	It seems the axis powers were busy in getting to the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks...g_World_War_II __________________ "There is always one person in any organization who knows whats going on, That person must be fired"

10-02-08, 06:32 PM	#13
BasilY Weps Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 359 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	Come to think of think of it, Japan never learned the convoy tactics used some well by the Brits.